Shooting both kits each with a 50mm, the Nikon files are by far superior in terms of metering, shadow noise, detail, great colors, etc....Overall, the D610 files are simply take a lot less work (due to superior noise, sharpness and metering) to get them where I need them to be.

No disrespect, but if this were true, why doesn't it show up in any of the tests here or at Imaging Resource?

The resolution difference is negligible. (Sharpness is driven by lens, camera or RAW settings, and post work.)

Noise differences in RAW are also negligible, though I would say the 5D3 is ever so slightly better (I see spots in test shots where the 5D3 has a bit less chroma noise). In JPEG the 5D3 is clearly better.

Color differences are tiny in test shots, as they are between any two modern sensors.

I believe you see differences. I just don't believe they are actually due to the cameras or sensors given that carefully executed tests show no real differences.

IR doesn't use the same time when they compare cameras and iso, often Canon are 2/3 stop more exposed in comparison example 1/740 sec compared to 1/1250 sec and Nikon

Nikons CFA is better than Canon which shows in DXO measurements

Now colors are rather subjective and I can get Canon and Nikon to look very similar but the facts are Nikon has better color depth than Canon

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, SinarMember of International anti-banding and read out noise Association